Rush Limbaugh said: “Everything about the left is perception, manipulation, and lies. Everything. Everything is ‘Wag the Dog.’ Everything is a structured deception.”
Argumentation is a very delicate machine. For one to debate properly, one must not only have vast knowledge of the given subject, but they must also possess a calm, and reasoned demeanor. Once one moves outside rationality and a soft-spoken approach, they lose all credibility–even if they have great knowledge. In that same vein, one cannot handicap an opponent based on race, gender or life circumstances. Our minds can perceive situations well outside our own experience. If that were not the case, no one could ever seek election. Essentially, I don’t have to cut off my own hand to know it’s a bad idea.
The Left would argue otherwise. There are numerous instances when those on the Left tell Conservatives that they cannot–because of their gender, race, or life experience–speak about certain issues. If you’re not a woman, you can’t speak about abortion; if your not black, you can’t speak about race, etc. This is a common Liberal argumentation tactic. It creates an environment where the Liberal holds all the cards, where the Liberal can fix the game.
CNN anchor, Don Lemon recently used this argument on his show. Guest Ben Ferguson was discussing the Trayvon Martin case, and the President’s remarks regarding it when Lemon essentially told him that because of his race, he had no authority to speak about such things. The following is an excerpt of the interview:
Ferguson: “I have seen women, when I go to my parking garage every day, they are nervous when they are by themselves, regardless of the age or the man that’s around them because they’re in a vulnerable situation. That’s not only during issues of race.”
Lemon: “If you think it’s equal…and I don’t mean to call names, but I think you’re sadly naive.”
Ferguson: “Are you saying Don, that every woman in America that’s white is automatically, 100% of the time terrified of an African American man in any one of these situations, but they would not be terrified if it was a white or Hispanic man? That’s an incredibly broad brush. That’s what you’re implying—”
Lemon: “That’s not what I’m implying, that’s what you’re hearing. I’m telling you my experience, the president’s telling you about his experience. And you’re saying that we’re not having that experience. Who are you to tell us we’re not having that experience, when you’re not living it? You’re not in our bodies. It’s insulting for you to say, ‘No that’s not happening.’ You don’t live as a black man, you don’t know that…You have a certain entitlement as a white person that people of color don’t have. You don’t see that? You’re filtering through a place of privilege that you don’t understand. Your privilege does not allow you to see certain biases and certain circumstances in society.”
1. Lemon is using the age-old tactic of “You can’t understand me because you aren’t me.” This is patently absurd for many reasons. Lemon tells Ferguson that because he is not black, he cannot possibly understand what’s going on. Unfortunately, this is an oft used argument, generally employed by those who have no idea how to properly debate an issue. The human mind is certainly capable of a breadth of understanding beyond its own experience. I know that committing murder is wrong, even though I myself have never killed. I can intelligently discuss the morality of homicide without having experienced it myself. Human beings are capable of understanding a wide array of circumstances through empathy, and intelligence. If that were not the case, no one would understand any other person, because we all experience life differently in one way or another. For someone to say that one is banned from discussing an issue simply because they have not personally experienced it is ridiculous.
2. Lemon is also building a straw-man. Lemon argues that Ferguson is invalidating his experience by offering a different perspective. Lemon says: “And you’re saying that we’re not having that experience. Who are you to tell us we’re not having that experience, when you’re not living it? You’re not in our bodies. It’s insulting for you to say, ‘No that’s not happening.'” Ferguson was never trying to invalidate the experiences of the President or of Don Lemon, he was simply offering a counter argument. But because Lemon didn’t have a valid counter for Ferguson’s argument, he became indignant. Becoming indignant is the quickest way–although also the worst way–to “win” and argument.
3. Don Lemon also tells Ferguson that he is naive. An ad hominem attack is a sign that one is losing an argument.
The Left in America rely on indignation, ad hominem attacks, and straw-men. They need these fallacious argumentation tools to win debates because they have nothing else. Facts bounce off of Liberals like bullets off of Superman. Liberals are impervious to logic.
I am sick of Liberals using the “You can’t understand me because you aren’t me” argument. It is bogus. Just a small dose of logic can deconstruct the Liberal argument. Don’t let the Left get away with lies. Next time you debate a Liberal, just pull the string, and watch it all come falling down.